COACH DRIVER WAS INTOXICATED AT TIME OF CRASH AND FIRE|火燒車26死重大發現 遊覽車駕駛竟酒駕

Investigation into the fatal bus fire incident that caused 26 deaths has revealed new evidence. Another major discovery was made after prosecutors recovered 5 plastic containers tested positive for petrol. The forensic report on the body of the driver Su Ming-Cheng was released on the 29th. Alcohol was found in Su's blood, urine, and stomach content. His alcohol level was equivalent to a breath alcohol content of 1.075 milligram per liter. The finding confirmed that Su was drunk driving at the time of the accident. Prosecutors also found that Su did not have any other insurance policies other than the company's liability insurance. Investigators are trying to determine whether the fire was an accident or if Su had other motives in causing the incident. The memorial service for the driver Su Ming-Cheng, who was killed in the bus fire, was held on the 29th. Prosecutors announced a major finding in the investigation, which revealed that Su's blood, urine, and stomach content all tested positive for alcohol. His alcohol level was equivalent to a breath alcohol content of 1.075 mg/L and confirmed that Su was driving while intoxicated. ==WANG YI-WEN, Spokesperson, Taoyuan District Prosecutors Office== He mostly likely consumed alcohol around the Neihu or Nangang areas. (Is it possibly a case of suicide?) Prosecutors cannot rule out suicide but cannot confirm any speculations. Su had been a bus driver for 20 years. He originally came from China and was the bread earner of the family. He had three children. It was unclear why Su was driving under the influence. According to prosecutors, Su had a 2-hour break after he dropped off the Chinese tour group at Ever Rich Duty Free Shop. As the tour group was about to leave, they could not find Su, and the itinerary was delayed. Investigators are trying to find out if Su consumed alcohol during this period of time. ==LIN CHING-HUA, Owner, Bus Operator== Alcohol and drugs are strictly prohibited in our company policies, so we're all really shocked to hear about this and trying to find out what happened. (Do other drivers know if he drinks?) He doesn't really have friends at work. Prosecutors reviewed surveillance footage in the Neihu and Nangang areas to find out where Su had been after he left the duty-free shop. The cause of the fire was first suspected to be faulty equipment. Now the investigation is pointing to human error. Although the bus driver died in the fire, legal experts say the bus operator that hired the driver should also bear civil or even criminal liabilities. ==WANG CHEN-HENG, Attorney== Article 188 of the Civil Code requires the employer to take joint responsibility for the employee's errors and omissions at work, or even intentional harm caused by the employee. The new evidence raised even more suspicions. Was Hsu unable to react immediately because he was intoxicated? Or was he involved in the cause of the fire? Prosecutors are now trying find out the answers to these questions. TRANSLATED BY:CHRISTINA LIU 陸客團火燒車事故,造成26人死亡,繼檢方在遊覽車內,找到5個裝有汽油的塑膠瓶後,全案又有重大發現!駕駛蘇明成遺體鑑定報告,昨天出爐,血液、尿液和胃容物,都出現酒精反應,確認是酒駕。檢方調查發現,蘇明成除了公司意外險外,並沒有其他保險,究竟是單純意外?或者蘇明成有輕生念頭,還要進一步調查。 禮儀人員用布幕遮掩,讓會場不讓外人進入,在陸客團火燒車意外,當場死亡的駕駛蘇明成,今天舉辦告別式,全案同時也出現重大發展,檢方公布蘇明成的遺體鑑定報告,指出在他的血液、尿液和胃內容物,都有酒精反應,換算吐氣,酒精濃度達到1.075毫克,顯然是酒後開車。 ==桃園地檢署發言人 王以文== 比較有可能的飲酒地點 是在台北市內湖地區 及南港地區一帶 (有沒有可能是自殺) 這個部份 檢方不排除 任何的可能性 目前無法證實 從事大客車駕駛已經20年的蘇明成,從大陸來台灣依親,是家中重要的經濟來源,有3個子女,為什麼會喝酒上路?檢方調查,蘇明成載陸客團到昇恆昌免稅店後,有將近2小時的休息時間,陸客要離開,前往桃園用餐時,一度找不到蘇明成,導致時程有所延誤,但蘇明成是否是利用這段時間飲酒? ==玫瑰石通運公司負責人 林靖樺== 我們都禁酒 禁毒 所以聽到這消息 蠻驚訝的 我們現在也是在了解當中 (其他司機 有人知道) (他確實有喝酒習慣嗎)沒有 他在司機 同事之間 幾乎沒有朋友啊 檢警將調閱內湖和南港地區監視器,釐清蘇明成離開昇恆昌後的行蹤,這起陸客團火燒車事故,從一開始被質疑,可能是安檢問題,到日前,檢方在遊覽車找到5瓶裝有汽油的塑膠罐,如今,又發現駕駛是酒駕,肇事原因,逐漸朝向人為釀禍,只是就算真的認定是駕駛疏失,但人已死亡,依法並無法追訴,但法界人士認為,聘雇駕駛的遊覽車業者,還是難逃民事甚至刑事究責。 ==律師 王晨恒== 依民法188條的規定 即使對於受僱人 執行職務的過失 或者甚至是故意的一個行為 造成的損害 雇主還是要連帶負賠償責任的 一場火燒車,出現眾多疑點,究竟遊覽車起火後,是蘇明成是因為酒醉,無法做即使處理,還是他本身和火燒車,就有直接關聯,還有待檢方進一步釐清。 記者 蔡慧玲 邱福財 詹淑雲 綜合報導

九合一選戰解析

相關新聞